As The Denver Post[3]’s Christopher N. Osher[4] reports, while Maes initially thought of the program as most of us do – as a harmless, if marginal, effort to reduce pollution – he now has seen the light.

(It’s that staticy TeeVee light that comes with lost signals, you know.)

“This is bigger than it looks like on the surface, and it could threaten our personal freedoms,” Maes said.

He added: “These aren’t just warm, fuzzy ideas from the mayor. These are very specific strategies that are dictated to us by this United Nations[5] program that mayors have signed on to.”

Now that your Spotted This Morning correspondent has signaled that he disagrees with Maes about the actual goals of the B-Cycle program, please allow me to make an argument that the gubernatorial candidate should have made.

The argument is that with so much transportation funding going to build such things as pricey light rail[8] systems that never pay for themselves, and which reduce only a fraction of vehicle miles traveled, cities are actually increasing congestion by not providing adequate infrastructure for those who drive.

Had Maes stuck to that line of reasoning, his message would have resonated with his party and even among some Independents tired of waiting for cyclists to get out of their way at rush hour.

(Tip to bicycle commuters: When you’re blocking a lane and backing up traffic for blocks, please at least find a sustainable cadence; that pedal-and-coast bit makes you look arrogantly indifferent to your fellow citizens. (And please don’t take offense at this criticism, because I’m with you that a lot of drivers don’t share the road like they should.))

But Maes didn’t sound any of those practical concerns. He went the Blue Helmets route, following an instinct that Tea Party[9] types would be wise to start reining in if they really hope to do such laudable things as reduce deficit spending.

Meanwhile, Maes has said other nutty things this week, as our next item address.

HEY DAN MAES, WE HEARD YOU ON ROSEN

The apparent frontrunner in the Republican’s gubernatorial primary race said some awfully harsh things about The Denver Post this week – which were demonstrably untrue.

In an editorial titled “Get your facts straight,”[10] we expose the falsehoods he made regarding our coverage of his finances this decade.

ROMANOFF EXITS THE IVORY TOWER

Mike Littwin’s analysis of the meltdown at Team Romanoff[11] yesterday gets it right, by pointing out that the millions of PAC dollars that compliment the overall bankroll at the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee are fungible, and the Obama-style fiction of not accepting PACs is ridiculously misleading:

Romanoff says he’ll take DSCC money only if PAC money is removed from his bundle. It’s what the DSCC has done for Obama, who doesn’t take PAC money.

Of course, it’s phony-baloney when Obama does it, and it would be just as phony if the DSCC would try to separate the money for Romanoff — which I doubt it would do.

If there’s a pile of money with tobacco money in it, it doesn’t matter which of the dollar bills you take. It’s still a pile of tobacco dollars.

If we concede that a mosque at ground zero[13] is a sign of our tolerance — and it is — surely debating the problems with its setting lets the world know we have the cognitive ability not to be a bunch of saps.

Bigot!

It is, you see, ugly and un-American to question the motivations of those opening an Islamic center a stone’s throw from ground zero — a project that will cost $100 million — but not ugly of organizers to pick a spot that’s a stone’s throw from ground zero.

Oh, and Obama did a telephone call in Colorado yesterday to support Michael Bennet[14].

Your Spotted This Morning correspondent skipped it in order to dine with his wife.

But if the president answered this burning question, please let me know at once:

How is Snooki?

Keep up with your Spotted This Morning correspondent on Facebook [15]and Twitter[16], for links and observations throughout the day.